Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing this matter to be taken on the adjournment this evening. It is unfortunate that I introduce a subject of this nature so early in the new Dáil session. I attribute no blame to the new Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, or to the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, who I congratulate on their elevation to office. I wish them both many years of success answering similar questions in the House.

A person in my constituency, who originally came from Donegal, was awarded jobseeker's allowance, allegedly in error. The lady in question has a husband, who is unemployed, and two children. They have serious debt problems, as have many other people in the country. They have no means of subsistence other than the jobseeker's allowance, which it is claimed was awarded in error.

A strange thing occurred during the recent general election campaign. An oral hearing was held in Tullamore, County Offaly. Evidence was submitted to the hearing by the applicant, and the Department appealed the decision to grant the allowance on the grounds that it was made in error. I take strong exception to the decision made at the oral hearing. Soon after the hearing the lady was informed that her assets were sufficiently large to deem her ineligible for jobseeker's allowance. The ineligibility was based on alleged assets of €148,000, which was the estimated value of approximately 14 acres of bogland in a remote part of County Donegal. I mean no disrespect to Deputy McConalogue or to my colleagues from County Donegal. Suffice to say the land was not on a main road leading to anywhere, was not near a financial services centre and did not have road frontage. It was nothing more than bogland with access to commonage for the owner and 20 or 30 other people.

A valuation was previously carried out by an auctioneer and valuer for the purpose of obtaining a loan and, of course, the details differ in such a situation, which is how the figure of €148,000 arose, with no disrespect to the auctioneer and valuer. In my opinion, however, the land is worth nothing in the present climate. I offered to visit Donegal with the investigating officer to see for myself what exactly the property is worth. My claim is that it is worth nothing or, if it was saleable and was put on the market at present, it might make up to €20,000. However, there might be no offers, as with many other properties.

I would be grateful if the Minister would give me an opportunity to meet the relevant officer onsite. I am happy to travel that distance to prove a point, as the Minister herself would do and has done on many occasions in similar situations, as I believe a grave injustice has been done to this lady, who is now my constituent. As I have said, this family are in dire straits. They have no resources and no income from any source, good, bad or indifferent, and are likely to require serious discussions with their banks in the immediate future.

I thank the Minister for dealing with the debate. I would be grateful if she could facilitate a review.

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am aware Deputy Durkan personally attended the appeal in this case. The matter arises from the review of a jobseeker's allowance claim in July 2009. The claimant was assessed with the capital value of farmland which she owns in Donegal and which she is neither using personally nor leasing to anybody else. She was assessed with weekly means of €570 based on the capital value of the farm. As her means were in excess of the statutory limits for receipt of the jobseeker's allowance, her claim was disallowed with effect from 12 August 2009.

She appealed this decision to the social welfare appeals office and her appeal was heard by a social welfare appeals officer on 15 February 2011. The appeals officer, having considered all the available evidence, disallowed her appeal after conducting an oral hearing.

Payment of jobseeker's allowance is subject to, among other things, the condition that the claimant must satisfy the means criteria. The rules as to calculation of means are set out in the relevant social welfare legislation. This legislation provides that, in assessing the means from property, land is assessed on its capital value basis where the claimant owns or has a legal interest in the land, and is not resident on the land; is not personally using the land; and legal possession of the land has passed to the person leasing the land so that the claimant cannot repossess it while the person leasing the land continues to fulfil the conditions of the lease. In this case, the person owns the land but is not leasing it on an 11-month lease. Consequently, it is assessed under the rules on its capital value.

The claimant put the farm up for sale and the asking price by her auctioneer was €175,000. The social welfare inspector who investigated the means for the review took the certified value of the land as set out by the auctioneer. The amount of means assessed from the property is €570 per week which is in excess of the statutory limits for receipt of jobseeker's allowance and her claim was refused on 12 August 2009.

While a formal decision issued to her advising that her claim had been disallowed, an administrative error was made in recording this decision. She was inadvertently paid jobseeker's allowance, equivalent to the full personal rate, qualified adult rate and two child dependants from 12 August 2009 to 15 February 2011. The claimant appealed the decision to disallow her claim to the social welfare appeals office. The Department submission and papers were sent to the social welfare appeals office on 15 August 2009. There was an oral hearing of the appeal on 11 February 2011 by the appeals officer. The appeals officer, having considered all the available evidence, disallowed the appeal.

As Deputy Durkan is aware, the person concerned applied for and is currently in receipt of supplementary welfare allowance since the stopping of the jobseeker's allowance payment, and this is now being investigated.